Critical review – Introduction to Social Science Research (KGNAANME01)

By Phung Nguyet Linh (U3172E)

Review: Fan, Y. and Shahani, A (2014) A. Country image of Pakistan: A preliminary study.
Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jtr.1998

In this essay, I will offer a critical review on the research “Country image of Pakistan:
A preliminary study” (Fan, Y., Shahani, A.), based on the theoretical framework of the textbook
“Research Methods: A Practical Guide for the Social Sciences (Matthews, Ross)”. The
research’s purpose is exploring Pakistan’s image, comparing the self-perception of Pakistani
nationals with people from other countries by collecting qualitative data from four focus groups
through a questionnaire. Results of the data acquisition suggests that perception about Pakistan
is often negative, and mainly affected by media. In my opinion, the methodology applied is
befitting; and even though the insight into the research questions is not profound, it is
adequately satisfactory given the study’s exploratory and preliminary nature. There are certain
flaws, mainly concerned with a lack of discussion on related ethical issues and the study’s
weaknesses, as well as the findings’ visual presentation.

I completely agree with the arguments made in the paper’s literature review: National
image is indeed a complex topic, the perception of country image is influenced by a variety of
factors, most of which are difficult to be measured and categorized; and accurately assessing
the current national image is crucial in the practical process involved with national branding.
The literature review successfully highlights the crucial role of media coverage regarding nation
image, as well as the difficulties arising in previous studies of the same field, in preparation for
the challenges that might occur in the research process.

The researchers approach the topic through qualitative rather than quantitative data,
using the focus group method in an informal setting. The reasons behind the sampling are
clearly explained and justified. Important practical details regarding the methodology and data
collection are included (such as how to choose the participants for the focus groups, the
inclusions and omission of certain questions, etc), which can facilitate for further studies in the
future.
 The focus group method is particularly useful in exploratory research, and I also believe
it to be the most appropriate choice for a qualitative research of this nature, for three reasons.
Firstly, from a logistical point of view, it is practical and economical. The participants are
chosen from a pre-existing setting: they are all students at the same university. The participants
in the research are very carefully selected, on the basis of nationalities, ensuring a diverse
collection of ideas and perspectives. The researchers also make certain that the number of
respondents in each group (which were categorized by continents) does not differ greatly from
one another. Secondly, using focus groups eases the process of finding out how people
experience and understand the issues related to Pakistan’s image. The final questionnaire is
carefully crafted for the foreigners and the Pakistani groups. The questions are straightforward,
at first assessing the participants’ general knowledge about Pakistan, then allowing further
expression of opinions about more complex and political matters. Thirdly, the relaxed setting
allows the participants’ answers to be assessed in their natural state. The focus group replicates
everyday conversations, where people “theorize” about the discussed topic. Each group is
videotaped and transcribed, meaning the authors can assess not only the responses themselves,
but also the speaking tones, non-verbal communication, etc. Both the content of the responses
and the manners of delivery are properly analyzed by the researchers in the interpretation of the
questionnaire.

However, the focus group method comes with its own limitations. Firstly, categorizing
the respondents by continents means the study fails to reflect the specific background and
political position of their home country. Generalizing these contexts might create a tendency of
steering the group’s answers towards the most common assumptions among said region’s
perception of Pakistan. Secondly, the imbalance in the ratio of genders among the respondents
(22 males: 7 females) might affect the responses. Different gender generally may have different
views and expression manners on political or religious matters. Thirdly, the study fails to
mention any ethical issues related to the focus group method. The questionnaire involves a
variety of sensitive topics, such as religious practices, nuclear weapons, etc. The participants
might be reluctant to disclose their opinions, especially in front of other members of the group,
who they might be acquainted with, given the fact that they all attended the same university.

The results of the findings are consistent with the aims of the research, thanks to the
straightforwardness of the questionnaire. They are presented in the ascending order by the
knowledge level about Pakistan, with the European focus group having the lowest level of
understanding and the Pakistani group with the highest. The authors offer insightful
explanations behind the answers of each group, such as: the lack of first-hand knowledge and
reliance on media coverage for perception on Pakistan-related issues among the European
respondents, similar religious backgrounds from the African group, the Asian participants’ real-
life interaction with Pakistani people, and the personal direct experiences and observation of
the Pakistani group. However, in terms of visual presentations, it might have been helpful to
the readers to have the tables formatted more clearly. The second appendix seems fairly
perplexing; due to a lack of clear visual division, it might be easy to confuse the findings of
different groups.

The results’ analysis refers back to the points previously made in the literature review.
Astute explanations (different cultural, religious, educational, and political backgrounds) about
the differences in perception between the foreigners and Pakistani groups are given. I agree
with the statement coining media coverage as the dominant factor in shaping most foreigners’
stereotypical reception of Pakistan. The discussion also accurately emphasizes the importance
of national branding and potential efforts that can be made by both the Pakistani people and
government. A small side experiment attempting to improve the respondents’ perception is
conducted and offers a very practical solution for the matter. However, only the shortcomings
of the small experiment at the end were mentioned, it would have been more useful and
objective to provide discussions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the study.

In conclusion, given the exploratory and preliminary aims of the study, I find it match
up well with what the authors set out to do. Particularly, the methodology is suitable and might
offer valuable guidelines for future studies. The research does have some drawbacks, which can
be improved by addressing related ethical issues and the research’s weaknesses, as well as
enhancing the visual presentation of the findings.
List of references:

Fan, Y., and Shahani, A. (2016) Country Image of Pakistan: A Preliminary Study. Int. J.
Tourism Res., 18: pp. 220– 227. doi: 10.1002/jtr.1998.

Matthews, B., & Ross, L. (2010, pp.235-252). Research Methods: A Practical Guide for the

Social Sciences. Pearson Longman.